Tag Archives: Amy Pascal

All of Hollywood and then the world were abuzz this week over the massive computer hacking of Sony Pictures Entertainment’s email system.

First it was about the idea that anyone could pull off such a massive theft of so protected a system.

Then it morphed into the high-minded conversation of whether it was done by North Korea in retaliation for the upcoming Sony movie, The Interview – a film where two schnooks played by Seth Rogen and James Franco are pressured by the US government to assassinate North Korea president Kim Jong-Un.

Yep… these two geniuses

From there it went to just about the only thing that can trump international intrigue in importance – and that would be the bitchy, salacious, gossipy and racially insensitive (Note: The latter are Rev. Al Sharpton’s words, not mine) hacked emails themselves.

Someone actually had the audacity to call unofficial Queen of the World Angelina Jolie nothing more than “a camp event,” “a celebrity” (Note: To be said with a sneer) and “a minimally talented spoiled brat,” only to then refer to her plan to star in a new film version of Cleopatra as “a $180 million ego bath.” You can thank Scott Rudin, currently the most prolific producer in contemporary Hollywood history whose credits include No Country For Old Men, The Social Network and Moneyball, as well as dozens of some of your other favorite major studio films and Broadway megahits, for steering the world toward that which is really important.

I have an EGOT, bitches

Except the spotlight was then quickly taken away by other email musings on the unofficial Most Powerful Man in the World, U.S. Pres. Barack Obama, by Sony Pictures Chair (Note: No relation) Amy Pascal. This was when she complained/wrote to Mr. Rudin at the end of one presumably very long day about having to attend a stupid breakfast (Note: Her words, not mine) honoring/fundraising for the prez, and wondered in printed correspondence to said producer, what to ask him. When Mr. Rudin sarcastically wrote, if he’d like “to finance some movies,” Ms. Pascal quipped back, “Should I ask him if he liked Django (Unchained)? To which Mr. Rudin countered “12 Years (A Slave).” To which Ms. Pascal bested or “The Butler” or “Think Like A Man.” To which Mr. Rudin topped “Ride-Along,” confessing he’d bet that the first Black president (who is, incidentally, equally as much White as he is Black) most assuredly likes Kevin Hart.

Don’t they know the president has very publicly admitted to being hooked on both House of Cards AND Homeland and that each have very few to no Blacks as regular cast members? Oh right, that’s TV. And not even HBO.

Unfortunately, the public conversation has now moved on to the inevitable public apologies by both the producer and the studio executive, ironically dispersed to press outlets mostly via email, where both producer and studio executive are desperately trying to steer the conversation back to where we started. In case you don’t remember where that is it’s the massive computer hacking of Sony Pictures email system and the crooks that perpetrated the crime. But both being extremely savvy and armed with a bevy of some of the most ingenious publicity consultants money can buy, the producer and studio head, in separate statements, each managed to smuggle in one other culprit — the complicit media who ran with the stolen goods (those pesky emails) and are thus continuing the crime of making these private, written conservations very public.

I mean, just who are the real villains here, anyway, they or we may ask?

It sure as hell ain’t me!

Are you tired yet? Well, perhaps. I know I am. But that’s only because we are once again dealing with complex issues there are no immediate answers for. However, these two grown adults (said prod & exec) acting like petty elementary school kids with the centralized power of high school bullies as they privately take down the more accomplished colleagues that they hate, are annoyed by or are just plain bored with, is something much more understandable. We can all relate tothat conversation because we have all either been bullied or have been the bully. Perhaps even both.

I was never good at determining villains because I tend to see the world in insurmountable shades of gray that can never quite be fully deciphered. I mean, even when I rant against people like the Duggars, Sarah Palin and Michael Bay I question for weeks afterwards whether I’m being completely fair or going to hell, though not necessarily in that order and not necessarily both every time.

So I am going to refrain from judgment and talk about two byproducts of this debacle – the victims and the broader reality.

The victims are not Pres. Obama, Angelina Jolie, said producer, studio head or the myriads of other very well paid, successful people whose privacy and/or dignity has been momentarily taken. They are all smart, resourceful, wealthy and have developed somewhat thickened skins from years in the battle. They can take care of themselves. No, it’s not fair but they’ll be fine. Believe it because it’s true. Really.

The victims are the hundreds of other Sony employees who will no doubt have their identities stolen, will lose their jobs because a corporation has to do something when this happens, have their health records compromised and spend the next number of years living in paranoia every time they correspond with anyone – whether electronically, in person or via any other tablet or instrument of choice. I know this as a victim of identity theft myself for two years running because some hateful cow or sow, buck or f–k (Note: Apologies animals) filed a federal tax return in my name and actually got two different four-figure refunds in my place each year. Trust me, it’s not fun.

Still, there are enough systems in place where these people should all be able to get beyond what’s happened to them and resume some semblance of a new normal life. It sucks the big one and it’s really awful that we live in a world where any one of us at any time can now be virtually violated with little consequence to the perpetrator. But one supposes that is the price we pay for eschewing snail mail for messengers, messengers for email, email for Twitter, Twitter for texts and texts for….microchip implants? I’m surmising, not suggesting. And by the way, I did finally get my tax return after more than a year – each time. I can only hope it takes less than that time for the average lower-mid level laid-off Sony employee to get their next job. But let’s err on the side of optimism. For now

What seems to bother me even more is not the crime – heinous as it is – or the victims of the theft – awful as it is to be a victim. Or even the unfunny racially tinged comments of the producer and studio executive – dumb and small-minded as they were in those moments and even now.

Ugh.. there’s more??

Rather, it is the accepted way business is done in the world. The cutthroat, diminishing, low brow fashion so many people exhibit in their industries when they do not get what they want when they want it and the manipulative, back-stabbing, underhanded tactics they will use in the most casual way to sabotage their perceived enemies as all the while they are smiling to their faces, sending them polite, charming and even complimentary communications or merely hiding behind their own work as a way to benignly avoid contact until they pull the big rug out from under those that they choose to engage in the first place. Perhaps this is human nature. But I don’t think so. And even if it is, we have evolved, if just a little, from the caveman days of hunt or be hunted and fight or flight. Haven’t we? Last I heard there were no Paleolithic nanos or iPods or even iPads. Which reminds me, it was Mr. Rudin’s perception Sony was acing out his upcoming movie about Steve Jobs with intended Cleopatra director and self-professed close friend David Fincher that began the brouhaha here in the first place… but let’s not get off topic.

“Leave me out of this!” says the deity that invented “the cloud”

I’ve spent the majority of my professional life in and around the entertainment industry and I know these hacked emails (Note: See links below for some samplings) typify the best and worst parts of show business. The best being the possibility that people love the piece of entertainment/art you’ve created or hope to create and respect you and your talents so much that they financially and enthusiastically support its coming to life in a way that can be seen by millions of people around the world it will not only please but perhaps influence or change for the better. The worst, however, are the endless and needless betrayals, insults, condescension and out and out lies behind your back or in front of your face by the very people you work with, have dinner with, party with or even do more than that with, who you could have sworn to anyone who will listen are your friends.

There’s an old expression I sometimes evoke to the college juniors and seniors that I try to prepare for the industry each semester and that is that show business is nothing more and nothing less than high school with money. I say sometimes because I’ve sort of put it to bed in the last year or two since after all this time it began to feel, well… tired. I agree – it’s very tired. But sadly, that doesn’t make it any less true.

This week Sony Pictures announced it has closed a deal with Mattel for what it believes will be the movie studio’s next big global franchise: a live-action comedy film built around —- BARBIE!!

This is not a joke.

Here’s a quote from the film’s producers, Walter Parkes and Laurie MacDonald, whose credits include: Men in Black, Gladiator, Catch Me If You Can, and Sweeney Todd.

Barbie…is a cultural symbol whose career choices have been as unlimited as her wardrobe. She is about empowerment, but never at the expense of fun. Our hope is to capture all of these aspects of Barbie in a modern take of the character that can appeal to moviegoers of all ages.

I think I might have heard Gloria Steinem say that once but I’m not sure. Though I’m positive that Barbie, smart gal that she is and certainly much more intelligent than myself, could remember.

Hey Babs, where’s your medal?

You can talk yourself into anything, especially in the movie business. That’s one of the classic mantras learned by those who survive at the top of the Hollywood executive heap for decades on end. Though it’s more than just talk. On some level, you do really have to believe what you’re selling. That’s the moment when the logic gets twisted to the point of an intricate uber-pretzel where, when you make your final announcement, it really does all sound exactly right. Though not always for the reasons you’ve advanced.

Meaning Barbie: The Movie is much more about financial empowerment than anything having to do with women – young or otherwise. Not that the two are mutually exclusive.

Someone’s gotta pay the mortgage on the dreamhouse…

I do believe that Mr. Parkes and Ms. MacDonald really believe what they’re selling. As does the very talented Sony Pictures chairperson Amy Pascal, a veteran executive who was mentored on her way up by writer-director Nora Ephron, one of the first women in the business to write and direct big successful studios films. Would Nora have taken on Barbie for the big screen? Well, we’ll never know that. But…did Nora happily play with her Barbie dolls as a little girl, so galvanized by her message of female empowerment that she would enable young Nora to climb to the top of the Hollywood heap as one of its most successful creative talents?

Uh, somehow I doubt it. More likely she galvanized Nora, who was neither blonde, 11.5 inches tall or as traditionally beautiful as Barbie, to figure something else out. Not to put arguments into her mouth against her will, but adult Nora did once famously write in regards to her decided lack of shapely, Barbie-like breasts: If I had them, I would have been a completely different person.

Oh Nora, we love you just the way you are.

Not only did Nora know that but I know that. And Amy knows that. And Walter and Laurie might or might not have known that but, for the reasons I’ve stated above, probably no longer know that.

Yes, it is true that young Nora did grow up in a different time and Barbie has evolved to a lot more than the size of her breasts. But there is still a general theme here that holds true.

The Barbie doll has been courted for years by film studios that were eager to turn her into a cash cow for the big screen. And why not? She’s known as a multi-billion dollar brand and has been around since the late 1950s – which seems a perfect time for the birth of an almost one foot tall female with perfect features and luxurious blonde wavy hair who has a centerfold’s figure, doesn’t put on weight and never, ever ages.

The website reveals that a major factor in Sony taking on Barbie over many other studio suitors was the story pitch the producers brought in with screenwriter Jenny Bicks. Ms. Bicks is well known for her work on female-centered comedies with a twist, including the television series Sex and the City and The Big C, as well as the big-screen What A Girl Wants, starring Amanda Bynes.

Apparently Ms. Bicks’ winning pitch was a contemporary tale that “allows the character Barbie to use her personal and professional skills to step into the lives of others and improve them, almost like a modern-day Mary Poppins.” She will also be alternately surrounded by her many friends, including her boyfriend Ken (as if he wasn’t already a living doll!) and various Mattel-franchised cohorts. Deadline goes on to say this will enable the casting of a new young actress to play the title character as well as other unknown or established stars as friends and family.

We live in a time of irony. You can make anything ironic. Even something iconic. But does anyone really think of Barbie as a Mary Poppins who goes in and fixes other people’s lives in even a non-ironic or even ironic way?

Don’t drag me into this!

Isn’t Barbie a kind of a…well…blonde bubblehead stereotype with a fabulous body and the perfect man? Even when she was a brunette?

No? Oh wait – I get it. In this movie Barbie will be insecure deep down – fixing other people’s lives but never really paying close enough attention to her own. But then one day, through fixing other people’s lives she realizes: Hey, wait a minute, maybe my own isn’t so great? Ken is a bit of a jerk airhead and really the slightly less attractive guy is the one for me. And all those clothes I’m known for – maybe I’m going a bit overboard and should really stop dressing like a, well – Barbie Doll – and start behaving like an empowered woman.

CUT!! Wait a minute. I said, CUT! Um, I don’t think so. There is NOTHING ironic about that. Certainly not from Mattel’s standpoint. And it’s very retro 1970s speak. This is Barbie. You can’t fuck with the franchise. Barbie is cool. Everyone wants to BEEEE Barbie. So – how do you do a movie like that and cause Barbie to change but maybe have it be more like Clueless or Legally Blonde.

Didn’t Anna Faris already make this movie?

Oh wait, no. I see — Barbie doesn’t change. Not really. Barbie is not IRONIC – she’s ICONIC. So it’s all about the world making assumptions about her and changing the WORLD, right??? Barbie has to change the world to her way of thinking. She’s gonna glam it up – and fix people’s lives – like a millennial Mary Poppins. And earn RESPECT. That’s right, respect. People look down on blondes and even some brunettes (Note: Barbie now has various hair colors) with perfect figures – especially when they’re 11.5 inches tall and have the perfect ass, boobs, man, uh — hands!

Barbie will show ‘em, though. Like Elle in Legally Blonde she’s not dumb, she’s just been judged. And like Mary Poppins, she’s practically perfect in every way. But she’s going one step beyond both of them. Only the naysayers don’t realize it. So she’s gonna show them and change the world – or at least the lives of the people who need her and, oh hell – let’s go for it – the whole town they live in. Heck – let’s make it bigger (it’s a tent pole), the entire city who needs her. Wait – how about the State? Country? C’mon – go biggest or go home – SHE CHANGES THE UNIVERSE!!!!!!

Are. They. Kidding???

Watch out Mars!

Okay, I suppose you can make anything entertainingly and acceptably ironic. It’s all in the point of view and execution. But is this really the best we can offer young women nowadays? On the other hand, maybe this is THE best argument for having Hillary Clinton as president in 2016. Which will probably be the year Barbie comes out.

(Note: Oh no, dear – Barbie isn’t gay. She’s not THAT ironic).

I mean coming out as in – gets released at movie theatres. Hmm, maybe it will become a campaign issue for Hillary (Side Note: Why do we always call her Hillary but Pres. Obama is never Barack and Boehner is never John?). And what will the future La Presidenta think of the Barbie brand of feminism? By that time Hillary Clinton will be a grandmother for almost a year so clearly we’ll need another issue to discuss with her on the campaign trail rather than whether she can balance her babysitting duties with getting back into the political workplace or even if she really wants to or even should at this point in her life. What could be better than the Barbie-ization of today’s world?

I could think of a few better things…

Yes, Barbie now not only has blonde, brown, red and probably several other colors of hair (not to mention races) but there is now Architect Barbie, Zoo Doctor Barbie, News Anchor Barbie, Rock Star Barbie, Race Car Barbie and even…Presidential Candidate Barbie (look out Hillary!). It’s been that way for some time and she has more careers (130 at last guestimate) than you can shake a stick at.

OF COURSE, I KNOW THAT. But in all of those variations, she still basically looks the same – a plasticized, perfectly proportioned version of femininity that can only be achieved using carefully engineered parts produced on an assembly line. (Note: Contrary to what we’ve been seeing in Beverly Hills lately, medical science has not quite achieved that in real life – yet).

It hasn’t?????

Some of it is about what we teach young people about perfection. The social upheavals of the 60s and 70s questioned and changed what we were teaching the new generation, particularly young women, about expression – until they didn’t. Strange as it might seem to the advocates of Movie Barbie, there was a time when I was growing up in those social upheaval years where Barbie had begun be thought of as ridiculous – as ridiculous as Playboy bunnies or GI Joes. Men killing people and women with perfect bodies rocking a pert ponytail were not seen as something to aspire to. And then, somewhere along the way, it became more tolerable. And then, well – a choice. You could have a great body but you didn’t have to be an idiot – although even if you chose to be one it would be okay. You didn’t necessarily want to kill people but you once again could – under the right circumstances. For example, if your country was really threatened. Because after 9/11 all “give peace a chance” bets were off, right? We all now kinda like a GI Joe machine cause we know there are reasons we will have to fight on these shores and better to be prepared at the very least.

Here’s the studio thinking in all of this. Well, it’s not exactly this but it does go something like this:

Of course, you can do a Barbie movie outright – all blonde and sort of, uh, bouncy – but that will probably/mostly have an appeal to red state America.

How about presenting it with irony – that will also appeal to the snidies in blue state America. The red states won’t necessarily see the irony but the blue states will so it can be optically correct, intellectual AND fun for both demographics.

And the young people? Well – they’ll just see it. It’s not up to us to tell them what to think. We’re just trying to entertain the masses – not educate them. As Samuel Goldwyn once famously said, “If you want to send a message, call Western Union!” Yuk yuk, yuk.

It doesn’t much matter how much anyone bitches and complains (NOTE: Except for me) we will have Barbie: The Movie. But let’s be real about Barbie and not try to hide it in a bunch of horse dung about the feminist twist blah, blah, blah. Sony’s publicists either got to Jezebel very early on or they’re not as savvy as we all thought because even they are saying ‘oh, girl power, Jenny Bicks, Sex and the City, truly funny concept, blah, blah, blah, Amy Pascal, female empowerment, blah, blah, blah, bah, blah.

Seriously?

Sorry Jezebel, ain’t buying it. Don’t promise me chicken fingers and deliver tempeh. To my way of thinking, that’s like spending tens of millions of dollars on an ad campaign to convince the world that the top 1% of this country are all job creators and not mostly just ultra-rich people.

Words have meanings. Say what you mean. Don’t bait and switch. Or buy the bait and switch.

Yes Sony, you are making a movie about Barbie – who is a doll version of a girl with flawlessly proportioned girlie features that almost no real life woman possesses – or if she does now she will eventually not possess them. What does it say about young women who are less than that when they always have to be shown the light by the perfect-looking ideal they will never be? Mary Poppins – Miss Practically Perfect In Every Way – was one of my favorite films in 1964 – when I was under 10 years old. And it was made when Barbie still WAS the ideal.

.. and maybe that carried on through 1968. Right Jane?

It is truly ironic that Barbie is being remade into some kind of new aspirant and that we can’t think of any way forward other than to go backwards. It’s also interesting the first letter in ironic is “I” because dolls are about the id and traditionally Barbie –with her appetite for new wardrobe and hairstyles – has always taught girls to be, on some level, all about the “I” – themselves. Not to change the world. At least the real world. That would be the pervue of a Susan B. Anthony doll. Or the Marie Curie doll. Or perhaps even the Hillary Clinton doll. But then again, they’re not 11.5 inches tall with perfectly pert bodies and a ponytail of practically perfect hair. No, you can’t have it all forever. Not if you are human and don’t have a plastic surgeon and toymaker stylist with you 24/7.

In 1993, there was a famous group called the Barbie Liberation Organization. It was a rogue guerrilla organization whose mission it was to reduce gender stereotyping and the way they went about this was to perform “surgery” on 300-500 Barbie dolls and switch the silly girlie sayings she spoke via the tape implanted in her backside with the more macho expressions used by G.I. Joe. The group then put the dolls back on toy shelves where unknowingly customers bought them for their kids, who quickly recognized the supposedly genderless remarks they were unintentionally (or perhaps intentionally) being fed were anything but since the opposite doll as saying them. The group caused a bit of a stir, but Mattel never responded publicly, the times changed and finally, they disbanded. Here’s a video of what they did and how they did it.

These days there is a famous young Ukrainian model and “breatharian” named Valeria Lukyanova who subsists on “cosmic micro-food” in order to maintain her Barbie-like figure (and face – check it out!) She hopes to one day be able to nix food altogether and survive on nothing but “light and air.” Not to mention Justin Jedlica, a young man who has had more than $150,000 worth of 100 cosmetic procedures to look like a human-life Ken doll. Don’t believe me on that either – lookie here.

AHHHHHH!

Certainly movie studios are free to do as many mass market, franchise films as they like. It is also understandable that they like to do this a lot given the fact that the way they stay in profit is not so much from their property’s theatrical release but through all of the ancillary revenue outside of that release that enables them to exist as a profitable corporate entity. Hence, dolls are the PERFECT subject for a feature.

What is not acceptable, however, is the lie or the massaged untruth. If the parents of young girls want to empower their daughters there are innumerable sources of entertainment, art and other cultural and intellectual endeavors that will enable such behavior. Watching Barbie: The Movie will not be at the top or even middle – or probably even at the bottom of the list. In all likelihood, given the infinite possibilities, it would not even be on that list at all.